BC-BBN-DODGERS-DIVORCE-NYT

LOS ANGELES - For nearly a year, Jamie McCourt has taken a wrecking ball to the image of the Dodgers with court filings that painted her and her estranged husband, Frank, with whom she is locked in a bitter divorce case, as profligate spenders who cared much more about their image and lifestyle than they did about the team.

On Monday, she took her turn knocking holes in the legal profession.

Jamie McCourt, who practiced law for 15 years, including a half-dozen in family law, needed hand-holding to make her way through documents that appeared to place ownership of the Dodgers in the hands of her husband.

In more than six hours of testimony, "I don't recall" was Jamie's favorite phrase, followed closely by "not that I know of" and "I don't remember."

All of which proved a point, said Steve Susman, Frank McCourt's lead lawyer, who spent most of the day grilling Jamie McCourt.

"It's as fictional as Harry Potter," Susman said of Jamie McCourt's contention that she was a co-owner of the team. "It's ridiculous."

The trial, which could determine whether the Dodgers are sold, resumed Monday after a two-week recess. The return was eagerly awaited by Frank McCourt, whose lawyers had their most substantive opportunity to go on the offensive.

Jamie McCourt's lawyer, David Boies had artfully kept Frank on the stand for the final three days of the first week of the trial, leaving his admissions that slashing payroll and increasing tickets were part of the business plan to linger in the public eye.

In the interim, calls for Frank McCourt to sell the team - including one from the former owner Peter O'Malley - had grown, and Manager Joe Torre announced he would not return next season.

Monday's testimony was expected to be one of the more intriguing parts of the trial, with Jamie McCourt being questioned by Susman, whose law firm has been described as a litigation assault weapon by The American Bar Association Journal.

There were few fireworks, however. Susman occasionally wiped his brow with a handkerchief and sighed several times, seemingly exasperated when Jamie McCourt, whom he noted had degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard and Georgetown, would ask him to repeat questions or said she did not understand what he was asking.

The testimony was so tedious at times that in the morning session, Superior Court Judge Scott M. Gordon yawned broadly.

"I don't think it was a very good day for lawyers," Victoria Cook, one of Frank McCourt's lawyers, said before stepping onto a luxury bus that shepherded the legal team and advisers back to Century City.

Such a transportation strategy might have been useful for Jamie McCourt. On her way to court, her driver backed up slowly outside the courthouse and hit a pedestrian, who was injured but not hospitalized, the police said.

That collision and the dents to Jamie McCourt's credibility aside, her lawyers maintained it was a good day in legal terms.

Dennis Wasser, one of her family law attorneys, said all Susman was able to demonstrate was that Frank McCourt held title to the Dodgers, which under California community property laws did not mean much. Wasser used an example of a car that is registered to an owner but is still considered community property.

"Just because you have title to an asset doesn't mean you own the asset," Wasser said.

Jamie McCourt tried to make that point when Susman showed correspondences from banks, Major League Baseball and a biography in the Dodgers' media guide, which listed her husband as the sole owner of the franchise. She did not dispute these, but said that in practical terms, they considered their business ventures a partnership.

"In my mind, everything was our marital estate," Jamie McCourt said. "We built it up together. Everything as far as we were concerned was ours together. Frank liked to be called the owner. That's fine with me. It's been that way for 30 years."

Jamie McCourt is expected to finish questioning by Boies on Tuesday. Then a crucial witness will be called: Larry Silverstein, a Boston lawyer who advised the McCourts on the marital property agreement that is at the heart of the case.

Gordon has scheduled the trial to run through Sept. 30, and then he will make a ruling.

In the wake of the blows to the Dodgers' image, the generally circumspect O'Malley, whose father, Walter, brought the team from Brooklyn, told The Los Angeles Times last week that Frank McCourt had lost all credibility in the city and should sell the team.

Things do not look much better on the field for the Dodgers.

Three starting pitchers - Hiroki Kuroda, Ted Lilly and Vicente Padilla - are free agents, and another, Chad Billingsley, could be in for a big raise in salary arbitration.

Many of the promising young players who had sparked the Dodgers' resurgence in recent years have regressed. Russell Martin, who is out for the season with a hip injury, was once considered by some the best catcher in the National League. But he has diminished so rapidly that he may have played his last game as a Dodger.

Matt Kemp, Andre Ethier and James Loney have been disappointments. And Jonathan Broxton, who closed out the NL's victory in the All-Star Game, is being booed as a middle reliever by the fans at home.

He seems to be only slightly more popular these days than lawyers - or the McCourts.